With less than two weeks until the California primary, opponents of the
paycheck protection Proposition 226 are being caught spreading misleading
information about the ballot initiative. While supporters insist it will
simply protect workers' wages from being spent on politics without their
permission, critics - organized labor in particular - falsely claim it will
hurt everything from public safety to donations to charity.

Last week, the United Way of America retracted a "legislative alert"
claiming Proposition 226 might affect charitable giving. United Way officials
blamed its release on inexperienced staffers, and said the initiative would
have "no bearing on voluntary charitable contributions." They
also warned that continued use of the report in the campaign could result
in legal action.

Californians are also receiving telephone calls from people asserting
that Proposition 226 will endanger police officers. The callers claim the
initiative will give public access to employee records, allowing revenge-seeking
criminals to find officers' home addresses. Three California laws, however,
specifically protect the release of personal information of law enforcement
officials.

An interesting aspect of these calls is that callers said they were calling
from phone banks in Florida, Nebraska and Oklahoma. A chief allegation of
Proposition 226 opponents is that supporters are relying on out-of-state
assistance.

"The desperate strategy employed by the anti-226 campaign is to
talk about anything buy returning control of union expenditures to union
members," said Yes of 226! Chief of Staff Ron Nehring.

A third debate on campaign finance reform began in Congress on May 21
with a dozen bills and an unprecedented 586 amendments under consideration
so far. No votes are expected until early June.

Congressional supporters of paycheck protection hope a Proposition 226
victory in California's June 2 primary will provide the momentum to pass
similar federal legislation. The initiative would require employers and
labor unions to obtain worker permission to use payroll deductions for political
activity.

Many congressmen are concerned increased campaign regulation, like a
ban on "issue advocacy" advertising and further limits on contributions
and spending, threatens Americans' right to unrestricted political speech.
Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-TX) told CongressDaily, "Money is not the
root of all evil in politics [it] is the lifeblood of politics." He
is a member of the "Free Speech Coalition," which is offering
amendments requiring the Federal Election Commission to issue the least
restrictive regulations possible, increase enforcement of current laws and
toend public funding of campaigns. Focusing on the current fundraising scandal,
they also seek to ban fundraising on Air Force One and other government
property and in places of worship.

By intentionally bucking perceived reform efforts, members of the Coalition
are putting principle before political safety. Congressman Ed Whitfield
(R-KY) told Roll Call, "I do worry about [a backlash] in my district,
but I have to do what I think is the right thing to do." Congressman
Roy Blunt (R-MO), on the other hand, said, "This case will speak for
itself, and we may come across helpful changes in the law because of it."

Campaign Finance Factoids

High "Business Community" Political Spending Report
Debunked

Union leaders often cite a figure from the Center for Responsive Politics
(CRP) that the "business community" outspent organized labor
in political contributions by a factor of 11 to 1 in 1996. They use this
as a justification for the continued use of mandatory union dues for political
activity. An analysis by the Claremont Institute, however, casts doubt
on CRP's claim. Almost half of the contributions CRP attributed to business
were found to actually be donations made by individuals who listed their
occupations as business-related. In an Investor's Business Daily commentary,
Claremont Institute Director of Research Glenn Ellmers noted, "individuals
give money to political campaigns for a thousand reasons, many (e.g. pro-life,
pro-gun, anti-gun) having nothing to do with business. Should all those
contributions simply be lumped into a 'business' agenda?'" CRP also
included professional associations like the American Association of Trial
Lawyers - a group often at odds with the goals of the business community
- among business contributors. Ellmers said, "including trial lawyers
with the business community is like counting the fox with the chickens."

AFL-CIO Official Endorses "Black Militancy" Conference

AFL-CIO Education Secretary Bill Fletcher recently shattered the misconception
that the union's leadership only endorses candidates and causes of the
Democratic Party. According to the San Francisco Bay View, Fletcher has
joined with the Communist Party USA, former Communist Party vice presidential
candidate Angela Davis and others to endorse the Black Radical Congress
in Chicago on June 19. The View reports the goal of the Congress is "to
revive and to rebuild the spirit of Black militancy and social justice."

Political Money Monitor is published by The
National Center for Public Policy Research to provide information on campaign
finance and political choice issues. Coverage of an event or article in
Political Money Monitor does not imply endorsement by The National Center
for Public Policy Research. Copyright 1998 The National Center for Public
Policy Research. Reprints of articles in Political Money Monitor are permitted
provided source is credited.